Talk:Wake Island
Navy Expeditionary Medal Was the Navy Expeditionary Medal with a "W" for Wake Island seen in Star Trek IV? If not I don't see the purpose of the Background section. After all, this is a wiki about Star Trek, not Military decorations. Even the wikipedia article about Wake Island doesn't feature the special ribbon. Now, if the "W" ribbon was seen, it can stay here, IMHO, if not, it's just creating articles for the purpose of adding US military info in the background section. Also, the image is way to blurry to talk about "seen fairly clearly". FleetCaptain: I can see that your are pretty much passionate about those articles and I don't want to slow your enthusiams, but I think that this is taking it a little too far, IMHO. --Jörg 20:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :The medal was seen but without the device. The whole point is that a Navy decoration seen in Star Trek IV was also given for the defense of Wake Island (for which we now have an article). Clearly not canon, but a good background note (at least I think so). -FC 21:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC) I still think that this is taking the references and background sections too far. It would be similar to listing something like "There is a Leonardo da Vinci statue on the town square of Milan which is well known for its gold base." I have no idea if there is such a statue in Milan but basically those references are on the same level as the Wake Island background section. --Jörg 21:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :We can take out the "W Device" if you like, that is a very minor point. On your second point, "it's just creating articles for the purpose of adding US military info in the background section", I am writing articles based on the appearance of these geographical items on the map in "The Cage". Never was my motive to push some kind of agenda of sneaking military info into Memory Alpha. -FC 21:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC) ::I agree with the removal suggestion for the "W device" note - this is very much "circumstantial evidence", so to speak, and we removed similar things from other articles in the past. For example, just recently an article about the "Magi" was deleted. We do have an article about the painting Adoration of the Magi, because that was seen - but we don't need to continue from there and create articles about individual parts of that painting. The same should be true, here. Was the medal, as seen in , the same as what was awarded for Wake Island? I thought that was the W device, which was not seen...? -- Cid Highwind 21:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :Removed and cut. Only a bare note remains that the same medal seen in STIV was given out for serving on that island during WWII. -FC 21:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC) ::::Actually, my problem is that we don't really know this is called Wake Island in canon. All we have is a dot on a map where, in the real world, Wake Island is. We don't know it was ever called that in canon, or that it is still called that in the 23rd century (see Iwo Jima, now Iōtō or "Iwo To"). That is why I think this article should not belong. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :I updated the article to reflect that the map reads "Wake I. (U.S.)". You can see it on the map even with the naked eye; using digital enhancement its even clearer. -FC 22:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC) Pacific & Nazi Maps :That Pacific map from is full of such jewels. Already I have identified Algeria, Greenland, the International Date Line, Korea, Midway Island, Fairbanks, as well as the Tropic of Cancer. I'm just beginning to get into the Nazi invasion map from which has a great deal of sightings of US cities for which we have no articles. These can all be considered canon since we have a verified on-screen appearance. -FC 21:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC) Do you plan to create articles for every dot seen on the Oklahoma map or just the capital? If we really start this, we can basically create article for every country on Earth, as, in one episode or another, all continents were seen, by which it can be inferred, that the countries are also seen there. Also: It's perfectly possible that the Nazis in "Storm Front" renamed all those cities to "Kraut-City" and "Bratwursthausen" etc. If the name is clearly legible: A page can be created. If it's just a small spot roughly at the same location were "Springfield" is located in our timeline, better not create the article. --Jörg 21:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :I think we are getting off topic and a little bit too sarcastic. I am obviously not creating articles for every dot on a map, only those who's names can be reasonably seen. As for this article, I've trimmed the background note removing most of the military information due to the concerns you pointed out. The only thing left is a reference that serving on this island in WWII earned a medal which can be seen in . So, thank you for your inputs and I've made the changes. -FC 21:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC) I wasn't sarcastic (well, except for Bratwursthausen, that is ;-)), as we have discussed that map in the past and how many articles we want to create using the names barely legible on the map and what the purpose of that would be. In "The Killing game", a map of Sainte Claire is seen that shows countless street and Church names. Creating pages for all those streets would be pretty useless, as all pages would just have the same information. "XXX street was a street in Sainte Claire". Similarly, "XXX was a US city seen on a map in "Storm front" would be pretty much superfluous as nothing of value besides that could be added. It would just crowd the US city template with cities that have no real Trek relevance (in contrast to New York, Carbon Creek, LA or San Francisco). --Jörg 21:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :Thats a good point. I would suggest dealing with the Nazi invasion map as the need arises. So far I've only written *one* article referencing that map! I don't plan to clutter MA with hundreds or even dozens of city articles. In fact, out of the entire Nazi map, I would say only about 6 to 8 city articles could really be written. A final point, I think we'll all agree that this article's talk page is not the place to discuss future articles which I may want to write. -FC 21:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :::I would have to agree that unless something really important happened there really isn't an actual need for these articles to be created is there? – Morder 21:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :Well, the system in place as I understand is that if a junk or meaningless article is created, it can suggested for deletion (or a merge). As far as what articles a person can and cannot write, if you take a look at and policies it says "Article subjects can include events, objects, or anything mentioned in an episode or movie." Importance of, opinion of, personal thoughts about, shouldn't really factor in. There are many such "small, slightly meaningless" articles (take a look at PC World) on this site. I personally feel this is actually a very good policy since it stops people from controlling articles on the site and/or pushing/bullying new users about what kind of articles they can write. -FC 21:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :::Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you can't include it, just is it worth it? Why not instead just create a page about the map itself and discuss what was seen on it? That type of article makes more sense as when people search for said city they'll still come upon it anyway and it gives more context for the city in question. Seems to me that having a lot of city pages will also invite people (mostly anons) to add information to it that isn't canon or relevant. – Morder 22:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :I wouldnt be 100% against a merge of all island articles into Pacific Ocean but don't have time to attack that one tonight. This is actually the last Pacific article that *I* plan to write. I couldnt find any other islands on that map that are clear enough to see even under digital enhancement. -FC 22:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC) :::Well, as always we should discuss such things! :) As for the PC World...to me...that's a worthless article and would be better suited to having a list of magazines for sale at Alexandria Books. Possibly even adding that info to the Alexandria Books article itself. – Morder 22:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC) merge is good idea but has to be done by nation state. Merge to U.S. Pacific Islands thats the actual teritory they are in real life. this does not include Hawaii because its a inner colony out of the 50 states. Guam cant be merged becasue its asociated with mainland asia not the pacific ocean. Midway and wake are grouped together then and still now as US pacific islands teritory 20:56, May 12, 2012 (UTC) :It wouldn't be a "merge" since there is no "U.S. Pacific Islands" article- so you are really suggesting a title change. I don't think that's appropriate, as the map identified the island as "Wake Island". Any other name was not seen in canon. 31dot 01:57, May 13, 2012 (UTC)